m1093

NATIONAL ARCHIVES MICROFILM PUBLICATIONSPAMPHLET DESCRIBING M1093

NATIONAL ARCHIVES TRUST FUND BOARDNATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS SERVICE

WASHINGTON: 1981

The records reproduced in the microfilm publication

are from

Records of the Office of the

Judge Advocate General (Army)

Record Group 155

and

Records of U.S. Army Commands3 1942-

Record Group 338

UNITED STATES ARMY INVESTIGATION ANDTRIAL RECORDS OF WAR CRIMINALS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. FRANZ AVER ET AL.NOVEMBER 1943-JULY 1958

On the 13 rolls of this microfilm publication are reproducedthe records of case 000-50-136, the Miihldorf Concentration Campwar crimes case (United States of America v. Franz Auer et al.),which was tried by a general Military Government (U.S. Army)court at Dachau from April 1 through May 13, 1947. In this trial,14 individuals associated with the administration and operationof five Dachau subcamps, known as the Miihldorf Group, wereprosecuted under the general charge of having violated the lawsand usages of war by having participated in the operation ofthe camps, which operations included "wrongful and unlawful" sub-jection of prisoners of war to "killings, beatings, tortures,starvation, abuses, and indignities." The inclusive dates ofthe records are November 1943 through July 1958, with a fewdocuments dated as early as 1928.

Included in this publication are German- and English-languagepretrial investigation records; orders of appointment of tribunaland counsel; a charge sheet; trial transcripts; prosecution anddefense exhibits; sentence reviews and recommendations; clemencypetitions; and prison records that were filmed to supplement thetrial record. Some prison records were not filmed because of per-sonal privacy considerations. While the majority of records arein English or are accompanied by English translations, a smallnumber of Polensky and Zo'llner (PZ) construction firm businessrecords have not been translated.

Background

Jurisdictions and Cases

In Europe, the United States participated in war crimestrials under three jurisdictions: that of the InternationalMilitary Tribunal (IMT), that of the U.S. military tribunalsat Nuernberg, and that of U.S. Army courts. General authorityfor the proceedings of all three jurisdictions derived from theDeclaration of German Atrocities (Moscow Declaration), releasedNovember 1, 1943, which expressed Allied determination to arrestand bring to justice Axis war criminals.

International Military Tribunal

The IMT tried 24 major war criminals and a number of organiza-tions in 1945 and 1946. Specific authority for U.S. participationin the IMT is found in Executive Order 9547 of May 2, 1945, whichauthorized Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson to representthe United States in war crimes matters and to act as Chief ofCounsel; the London Agreement of August 8, 1945 (as amended by

the Berlin Protocol of October 6, 1945), in which the United States,France, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union agreed to holdthe IMT; and the IMT Charter (an annex to the London Agreement),which outlined the rights and obligations of defendants, judges,and prosecutors.

U.S. Military Tribunals at Nuernberg

From 1946 to 1949, U.S. military tribunals at Nuernbergtried 185 individuals in 12 separate proceedings grouped accordingto type of crime or organization as follows:

No. ofCase No. United States v. Popular Name Defendants

I Karl Brandt et al. Medical Case 23II Erhard Milch Milch Case 1

(Luftwaffe)III Josef Altstoetter et al. Justice Case 16IV Oswald Pohle et al. Pohl Case (SS) 18V Friedrieh Flick et al. Flick Case 6

(Industrialist)VI Carl Krauch et al. I. G. Farben Case 24

(Industrialist)VII Wilhelm List et al. Hostage Case 12VIII Ulrich Greifelt et al. RuSHA Case (SS) 14

IX Otto Ohlendorf et al. Einsatzgruppen Case 24(SS)

X Alfried Krupp et al. Krupp Case 12XI Ernst von Weizsaecker Ministries Case 21

et al.XII Wilhelm von Leeb et al. High Command Case 14

Specific authority for the U.S. tribunals, which tried these12 cases, is found in Allied Control Council Law 10 of December20, 1945, which outlined trial procedures patterned after thoseof the IMT; Executive Order 9679 of January 16, 1946, whichauthorized the establishment of U.S. military tribunals; Officeof Military Government for Germany (U.S.) (OMGUS) Ordinances7 and 11 of October 18, 1946, and February 17, 1947, respectively,which spelled out details of trial procedures outlined by AlliedControl Council Law 10; and United States Forces, EuropeanTheater (USFET), General Order 301 of October 24, 1946, whichappointed Brig. Gen. Telford Taylor as Chief of Counsel for WarCrimes for the 12 U.S. military tribunals at Nuernberg.

U.S. Army Courts

From 1945 to 1948, U.S. Army courts (military commissionsand special or general Military Government courts) tried 1,672individuals in 489 proceedings. Specific authority for theseproceedings is found in Joint Chiefs of Staff Directive 1023/10

of July 8, 1945, which placed responsibility for certain warcrimes trials in Germany on the Commander, USFET. The Commander,in turn, empowered the commanding general of the Western MilitaryDistrict (territory occupied by the U.S. 3d Army (Bavaria)) toappoint military courts, predominantly at the site of the formerconcentration camp Dachau, for the trial of war criminals notheard at Nuernberg. This was done in a letter on the subjectof "Trial of War Crimes and Related Cases" of July 16, 1945.The commanding general of the Eastern Military District (territoryoccupied by the U.S. 7th Army (Hesse, Baden-Wuerttemberg, andBremen)) was similarly authorized to commence war crimes trials,mainly at Ludwigsburg. In order to streamline operations, theCommander, USFET, revoked this division of authority in a letterof October 14, 1946, and assigned responsibility to prosecutewar criminals to the Deputy Judge Advocate for War Crimes, USFET.Henceforth, all cases were tried at the site of the former con-centration camp Dachau because centralization of war crimesactivities appeared necessary in view of the large body of casesand investigations.

The 489 cases tried by the U.S. Army in Germany can be dividedroughly into four categories: main concentration camp cases,subordinate concentration camp cases, flier cases, and miscellaneouscases. The first category comprises 6 cases with about 200defendants, mainly staff members and guards of Dachau, Buchenwald,Flossenburg, Mauthausen, Nordhausen, and Muhldorf concentrationcamps. The second category includes about 250 proceedings againstapproximately 800 guards and staff members of the outcamps andbranch camps of the major camps. The third category encompassesmore than 200 cases in which about 600 persons, largely Germancivilians, were prosecuted for the killing of some 1,200 U.S.nationals, mostly airmen. The fourth category consists of afew cases including the Malmedy Massacre Trial, in which morethan 70 SS men were tried for murdering large groups of surrenderedU.S. prisoners of war; the Hadamar murder factory case (see NationalArchives and Records Service Microfilm Publication M1078), inwhich a number of Hadamar Asylum staff members stood trial forthe killing of about 400 Russian and Polish nationals; and theSkorzeny case, in which some members of the German Armed Forceswere charged with wearing U.S. Army uniforms while participatingin the Ardennes offensive.

On March 28, 1947, the Muhldorf Concentration Camp casewas referred for trial by the Deputy Judge Advocate for WarCrimes to the general Military Government court that had beenappointed under the authority of Special Order 1, paragraph 11,dated March 15, 1947, Headquarters, European Command (EUCOM;formerly USFET).

The Muhldorf Concentration Camp Case

0^Muhldorf Concentration Camp derived its name from the nearbycity; it was also known.as M I Lager and as Mettenheim. TheMuhldorf Cencentration Camp was composed of four sub-camps:

Waldlager V and Waldlager VI (two camps adjacent to'each otherand counted as one camp, also referred to as the Forest Camp),Mittergars Lager (also known as Cone Lager), Thalheim Lager, andGendorf Lager. The inmate population of Muhldorf was between2,500 and 3,000--Waldlager having between 1,500 and 2,000 andMittergars between 200 and 300. Thalheim had only about 100civilian inmates and a few prisoners of war. Gendorf also hadvery few inmates and did not figure prominently in the case.This group of camps was known as the Muhldorf Ring or MuhldorfGroup or the Muhldorf Concentration Camp.

Approximately 8,300 inmates were confined in these campsbetween July 1944, when construction of an underground factoryfor use in connection with the assembly or manufacture of air-planes began, and April 1945. The inmates were Hungarian, Polish,Greek, Czech, Yugoslav, Lithuanian, Italian, Dutch, French, andRussian nationals. Some of the Russian, Polish, and Italianinmates were prisoners of war. The majority were politicalprisoners or "voluntary" workers.

The War Crimes Investigating Team #6827 reported thatbeatings, overwork, unsanitary living conditions, exposure tothe elements without adequate clothing and shelter, a starvationdiet, and a patent disregard for medical needs resulted in thedeath of about 1,800 inmates. The team pathologist stated thatoverwork combined with a starvation diet was the chief cause ofdeath at these camps.

Organization Todt (OT), a Nazi government constructionand engineering agency, was assigned general responsibilityfor the construction project at Muhldorf. OT at all times remaineda planning and supervisory agency that subcontracted the con-struction work to various firms, primarily the firm of Polenskyand Zollner (PZ). The Schutzstaffel (SS), the elite guard ofthe Nazi Party, managed the Muhldorf Concentration Camp andthe inmate work crews, which were supplied by the SS to the OTand PZ.

The following 14 defendants were indicted and listed onthe formal charge sheet:

Franz Auer, SS Technical Sergeant (SS Hauptscharfuehrer):labor commitment official, responsible for supplyingrequired number of laborers.

Karl Bachmann, Director of Munich Office, Polensky £ Zollner:responsible for use and direction of concentration campprisoners.

Wilhelm Bayha, SS Staff Sergeant (SS Oberscharfuehrer):construction detail leader, responsible for special guarddetails.

Heinrich Engelhardt, SS Technical Sergeant (SS Haupt-scharfuehrer): Acting Adjutant, responsible for executiveduties.

Erika Flocken, Dr., OT civilian employee: OT chief physicianand responsible for all medical matters.

Karl Gickeleiter, PZ civilian employee: construction engineerfor PZ, chief PZ representative at construction site.

Hermann Giesler, OT official: director in charge of allphases of OT activities at the level of OT Group Number 6.

Daniel Gottschling, SS Corporal CSS Unterscharfuehrer):food supply official, responsible for issuing food.

Wilhelm Griesinger, OT official: construction chief andprincipal technical supervisor of construction at mainconstruction site, responsible for enforcement of contract.

Wilhelm Jergas, SS Technical Sergeant (SS Hauptscharfuehrer):roll call leader, Waldlager V-VI, responsible for gettingout details of laborers and in charge of SS Guards at mainconstruction site.

Anton Ostermann, SS Captain (SS Hauptsturmfuehrer): incommand of guards at Waldlager V-VI.

Jakob Schmidberger, SS First Sergeant (SS Scharfuehrer):detail leader, Waldlager V-VI, responsible for guarddetails.

Herbert Spaeth, SS Technical Sergeant (SS Hauptscharfuehrer):guard and clerk responsible for issuing food at SS level.

Otto Sperling, PZ civilian employee: supervisor of cementmixing at main construction site.

Eight officers were appointed to the court: Col. Andrew G.Garner, president; Maj. Devalson S. Purl, legal member; Col.James G. Watkins; Col. Clarence M. Tomlinson; Lt. Col. Jules V<Sims; Lt. Col. Carlisle B. Irwin; Lt. Col. Walter C. Dickey;and Lt. Col. Ottmar W. Eichmann. Mr. Morton Roth served aschief prosecutor and Capt. Robert Bachman as his associate.Mr. Robert Welch served as chief defense counsel and Lt. PaulHughes as his associate. Dr. 0. H. Leiling was special defensecounsel.

All of the defendants pleaded "not guilty" to the generalcharge and particulars. The first motion made by the defensewas that the court try the defendants who belonged to the SS,those who belonged to the OT, and those who belonged to the firm

of PZ separately because of prejudices to the individual casesthat would result from trying them simultaneously. The courtdenied this motion.

The defense argued that the construction of a bomb-prooffactory for manufacturing pursuit planes at Muhldorf was requestedby SS Reichsleader Heinrich Himmler. Defense agreed that OThad general supervision of the construction and was responsiblefor the physical care of OT personnel working on the main con-struction site. They argued that the OT met its responsibilitiesby providing adequate housing and that OT personnel made reportsat one or possibly two weekly meetings of department heads tothe effect that inmates were not receiving sufficient food forthe type of work they were required to perform. However, foodsupplies were scarce and remained scarce throughout the durationof construction. Defense also argued that it was not companypolicy to overwork workers because labor costs were calculatedaccording to an efficiency factor based upon expected productionof the various kinds of laborers. In view of the constructioncontract terms, the profit to the contractor would not have beenincreased by a policy of overwork. To counter the high deathrate accusation, the defense pointed to the example of thevolunteer Italian workers, a group whose death rate was particu-larly low in comparison to other nationalities represented atthe site. The defense also argued that the SS interfered withthe medical treatment of the inmates of the Muhldorf Ring andthat OT made two formal complaints concerning SS negligence.Defense pointed out that in the fall of 1944 the chief of themedical department of OT, Berlin, ordered that medical suppliesfrom the OT depot at Schwindegg be sent to the SS officialsin Muhldorf. As a result, a large supply of bandages andmedicines was shipped from the depot; however, the SS divertedthese supplies from the inmates to an SS unit. Concerningtransport of seriously ill prisoners to Dachau, defense arguedthat some food was sent along on the trains and that an addi-tional supply was expected to be picked up en route.

On May 13, 1947, the court announced its findings andsentences. Two of the defendants, Bachmann and Ostermann, wereacquitted. Auer, Flocken, Jergas, Spaeth, and Sperling werefound guilty and were sentenced to death by hanging. Engelhardtand Giesler received life imprisonment. Gickeleiter, Griesinger,and Schmidberger were sentenced to 20 years imprisonment,Gottschling to 15 years, and Bayha to 10 years. Those sentencedto serve time did so at War Criminal Prison No. 1, Landsberg,Germany, including Auer, who was executed there on November 26,1948. The death sentences of defendants Flocken, Jergas, Spaeth,and Sperling were commuted to life imprisonment when reviewedin May 1947. Subsequently, their sentences were reduced further,along with those of the remaining defendants.

Bayha was released on February 24, 1952. Engelhardt's lifesentence was reduced to 25 years on May 6, 1948, and furtherreduced to 15 years on August 10, 1951. He was released onparole on December 23, 1953, and discharged on June 16, 1955.Flocken's sentence was further reduced to 38 years on August 16,1956. She was released on parole on April 29, 1957, and dis-charged on July 13, 1958. Gickeleiter's sentence was reduced to10 years on August 10, 1951, and further reduced to time servedon July 19, 1952. Giesler's life sentence was reduced to 25 yearson May 6, 1948, and further reduced to 12 years on July 7, 1951.He was discharged on October 18, 1952. Gottschling1s sentencewas reduced to 10 years on July 18, 1951, and he was dischargedon January 11, 1952. Griesinger's sentence was reduced to 10years on July 7, 1951, and he was released on February 28, 1952.Jergas' sentence was further reduced to 30 years on August 10,1951, and to 25 years on July 19, 1954. On April 13, 1955,Jergas was released on parole and obtained a final release onApril 9, 1958. Schmidberger's sentence was reduced to 10 yearson May 31, 1950, and he was discharged on December 14, 1951.On August 10, 1951, Spaeth's sentence was further reduced to 1,5years. He was released on parole on January 28, 1954, and wasdischarged on July 4, 1957. Sperling's sentence was furtherreduced to 20 years on July 7, 1951. He was released on paroleon February 5, 1954, and was discharged on July 20, 1957.

Records Description

The Muhldorf Concentration Camp Case

Most records of the Muhldorf case, including prison records,are part of Records of United States Army Commands, 1942- ,Record Group (RG) 338. These records were created and originallymaintained by the War Crimes Group, Judge Advocate General'sOffice, European Command. Records of the Office of the JudgeAdvocate General (Army), RG 153, contain the few microfilmedrecords that were originally maintained by the War Crimes Branch,Judge Advocate General's Office, Washington, D.C. The recordsare identified by record group number in the table of contentsand on each roll of film.

The Muhldorf trial authorization documents are filmed atthe beginning of roll 1. Included are the principal documentsauthorizing the U.S. Army courts. Filmed with these documentsis European Theater Operations United States Army (ETOUSA;predecessor of USFET) Organization Order 270, which organizedWar Crimes Investigating Team #6827 (the team assigned to theMuhldorf case) on April 24, 1945.

Two finding aids—a witness testimony index (an alphabeticallist of defense and rebuttal witnesses that also provides anindex to their testimony) and a trial record table of contents(a chronological or daily list of trial exhibits and witnesstestimony)--are filmed after the authorization documents.

Records of the Muhldorf Concentration Camp trial comprisethree groups filmed in the following order: pretrial records,trial transcripts and trial exhibits, and posttrial documents.Within these groups, the records are arranged and filmed chrono-logically, except for certain numbered pretrial exhibits andposttrial clemency records that are arranged and filmed alpha-betically by defendant and either numerically or chronologicallythereunder. File folder covers are filmed preceding the recordsin the folders in all instances where they provide identifyinginformation. Target sheets have been prepared and are filmedin place of folder covers in all instances where the coversprovide no information. The English-language version precedesthe German-language version in cases where both were available,unless they were reversed as part of a numerical sequence, inwhich case the numerical sequence is maintained. Duplicatecopies of records were omitted before filming began.

Records making up the pretrial documents include eight volumesof witness interrogation reports, lists of suspects, investigationreports, pretrial exhibits, camp maps, photographs of witnesses,prisoner transfer requests and authorizations, preliminaryprosecution briefs, internal routing slips, and German-languagebusiness records of the PZ construction firm. The businessrecords document the use of inmate laborers by the firm, as wellas personnel, procurement, billing, administrative, and construc-tion activities. Court and attorney appointment documents anda charge sheet make up the remainder of the pretrial documents.

The trial transcripts are in English and are arrangedchronologically in 23 volumes. Each volume covers a day of thetrial and is preceded by transcript covers and cover sheetsthat contain the names of the chief prosecutor and defensecounsel, interpreters, and court reporters, together with adaily listing of testimony, witness statements, and exhibits.The text of the transcript is numbered sequentially from page1 through 1596. It contains the arraignment and plea of eachdefendant, opening and closing statements of defense andprosecution, the judgment, and sentences. Following page 1596of the final volume, individual defendant's commitment formsare arranged alphabetically by defendant surname.

Prosecution exhibits are numbered sequentially, 1 through87, and are contained in six volumes, each with a table ofcontents. Other than affidavits, the exhibits consist of charts,diagrams, atrocity photographs, prisoner transport lists, andhospital death records. Not all prosecution exhibits wereaccepted as evidence by the court. The following exhibits orparts of exhibits are missing from the records: Photographs 11and 17 in exhibit 13; photographs 9, 10, and 23 in exhibit 40;exhibit 43, PZ records in a hard cover binder; exhibits 53-55,medical requisitions; exhibit 42, PZ records; exhibit 45, DeathBook of the Forest Camp (V-VI); exhibits 78 and 79, hospital

death books, exhibit 80, a folder of transport lists, and exhibit81, transfer lists (the originals were withdrawn; however, samplesof each were retained as part of the file and are filmed innumerical sequence); exhibit 83, a letter from the SS campsurgeon at Dachau; and exhibit 86, a request for travel fundsfor Giesler.

Defense exhibits consist of one volume containing a tableof contents that gives document number and description. Theexhibits are numbered sequentially, 1 through 44, and includeaffidavits, a pamphlet on conditions of work under OT, newspaperclippings, and photographs of the construction project.

The posttrial material includes three categories of records:sentence reviews and related documents, clemency petitions andrelated documents, and parts of the prison files. The firstcategory contains petitions for review in 1947 for defendantsFlocken, Gickeleiter, Giesler, Griesinger, and Sperling; the"Review and Recommendations" of the Acting Deputy Judge Advocatefor War Crimes of 1948; miscellaneous records, 1948-50, consistingof correspondence, extracts, and summaries of the trial proceedings,sentence review forms signed by Gen. Lucius D. Clay, Commanderin Chief, Headquarters, European Command (EUCOM), certificatesof execution of sentences, and petitions for review; and reportsof actions in 1951 and 1952 by the War Crimes Modification Board,which was appointed under General Order 106, Headquarters, EUCOM,and amended by General Order 19, Headquarters, EUCOM.

Clemency petitions and related documents are arrangedalphabetically by defendant's surname. The case review foldersare arranged numerically and include an index in memorandumform from the War Crimes Branch, Judge Advocate Division, EUCOM,to EUCOM War Crimes Modification Board. Additional files ofmiscellaneous petitions are included for some defendants. Theseare arranged chronologically. Included are German-languageclemency petitions and letters of appeal with English translationsby or on behalf of defendants, petition acknowledgments, andperiodic review and recommendation forms. Files do not existfor Bachmann and Ostermann, the two defendants who were acquitted.

The prison records filmed in this publication comprise anumber of items selected to document more fully the outcome ofthe trial and to portray the evolution of the legal process.They are arranged alphabetically by defendant's surname andchronologically thereunder. Files do not exist for Auer andfor Bachmann and Ostermann.

Certain posttrial records are not filmed because of personalprivacy considerations. Material so restricted has been removedand replaced by a charge card providing a description of theremoved document. Each charge card is filmed in place of the docu-ment. Also not filmed are several language class notebooks fromprison-sponsored classes attended by Flocken during the time ofher imprisonment.

9

Related Records

Microfilm publications of related records in RG's 153 and 338include:

United States of America v. Alfons Klein et al. (Case Files12-449 and 000-12-31), October 8, 1945-October 15, 1945,M1078;

United States of America v. Kurt Andrae et al. (and RelatedCases), April 27, 1945-June 11, 1958, M1079;

German Documents Among the War Crimes Records of the JudgeAdvocate Division, Headquarters, United States Army,Europe, T1021.

The Miihldorf trial records are closely related to microfilmedrecords in National Archives Collection of World War II War CrimesRecords, RG 238, specifically:Prosecution Exhibits Submitted to the International Military

Tribunal, T988;Records of the Office of the United States Chief of Counsel for

War Crimes, Nuernberg Military Tribunals, Relating to NaziIndustrialists, T301;

Records of the United States Nuernberg War Crimes Trials:NOKW Series, 1933-1947, T1119;NG Series, 1933-1948, T1139;NM Series, 1874-1946, M936;NP Series, 1934-1946, M942;WA Series, 1940-1945, M946;Guertner Diaries, October 5, 1934-December 24, 1938, M978;

Records of the United States Nuernberg War Crimes Trials, UnitedStates of America v.:

Karl Brandt et al. (Case I), November 21, 1946-August 20,1947, M887;

Erhard Milch (Case II), November 13, 1946-April 17, 1947,M888;

Josef Altstoetter et al. (Case III), February 17, 1947-December 4, 1947, M889;

Oswald Pohl et al. (Case IV), January 13, 1947-August 11,1948, M890;

Friedrich Flick et al. (Case V), March 3, 1947-December 22,1947, M891;

Carl Krauch et al. (Case VI), August 14, 1947-July 30, 1948,M892;

Wilhelm List et al. (Case VII), July 8, 1947-February 19,1948, M893;

Ulrich Greifelt et al. (Case VIII), October 10, 1947-March10, 1948, M894;

Otto Ohlendorf et al. (Case IX), September 15, 1947-April10, 1948, M895;

Alfried Krupp et al. (Case X), August 16, 1947-July 31, 1948,M896;

Ernst von Weizsaecker, et al. (Case XI), November 4, 1947-April 13, 1949, A/597;

10

Wilhelm von Leeb, et at. (Case XII), November 28, 1947-October 28, 1948, M898;

Records of the United States Nuernberg War Crimes Trials Interroga-tions, 1946-1949, Ml019.

In addition, the record of the IMT at Nuernberg has beenpublished in Trial of the Major War Criminals Before the Inter-national Military Tribunal, 42 vols. (Nuernberg, 1947). Excerptsfrom the subsequent proceedings have been published as Trialsof War Criminals Before the Nuernberg Military Tribunal UnderControl Council Law No. 10, 15 vols. (U.S. Government PrintingOffice, 1950-53). Detailed finding aids with computer-assistedindexes for the microfilmed records of the Ohlendorf Case(Special List 42) and the Milch Case (Special List 38) havealso been published. The National Archives and Records Serviceholds motion pictures and photographs of many sessions of theIMT and of the 12 U.S. Nuernberg proceedings as well as soundrecordings of the IMT proceedings only.

Karen D. Paul arranged the records of the Muhldorf casefor microfilming and wrote these introductory remarks.

11

CONTENTS

Roll Description Inclusive Dates

1 Finding AidsDocuments of Authorization Nov. 1, 1943-Nov. 1, 1946Witness Testimony Index

(RG 338)Trial Record Table of Contents

(RG 338)Preliminary Investigation and Other Pretrial Documents

(RG 338)

Vol. 1 Apr. 24-July 23, 1945Vol. 2 June 3-July 18, 1945

2 Vol. 3 May 2, 1945-Mar. 3, 1947Vol. 4 Mar. 27, 1944-Apr. 30, 1946

3 Vol. 5 May 3, 1944-Nov. 8, 1946Vol. 6 Oct. 3, 1944-Dec. 27, 1945

4 Vol. 7 Aug. 1-Nov. 8, 1946Vol. 8 June 22, 1945-Dec. 27, 1946

Court and Attorney Appointment Documents( R G 3 3 8 ) M a r . 2-28, 1947

Charge Sheet (RG 338) Feb. 27, 1947

Trial Transcripts (RG 338)

Vol. 1 (p. 1-49) Apr. 1, 1947Vol. 2 (p. 50-102) Apr. 2, 1947Vol. 3 (p. 103-156) Apr. 3, 1947Vol. 4 (p. 157-229) Apr. 4, 1947Vol. 5 (p. 230-308} Apr. 8, 1947Vol. 6 (p. 309-393) Apr. 10, 1947Vol. 7 (p. 394-473) Apr. 11, 1947Vol. 8 (p. 474-551) Apr. 14, 1947Vol. 9 (p. 552-629) Apr. 15, 1947Vol. 10 (p. 630-718) Apr. 17, 1947Vol. 11 (p. 719-796) Apr. 18, 1947Vol. 12 (p. 797-859) Apr. 21, 1947Vol. 13 (p. 860-914) Apr. 22, 1947

5 Vol. 14 (p. 915-976) Apr. 24, 1947Vol. 15 (p. 977-1057) Apr. 28, 1947Vol. 16 (p. 1058-1121) Apr. 29, 1947Vol. 17 (p. 1122-1206) May 1, 1947Vol. 18 (p. 1207-1272) May 2, 1947

13

Roll Description Inclusive Dates

Vol. 19 (p. 1273-1339) May 5, 1947Vol. 20 (p. 1340-1413) May 6, 1947Vol. 21 (p. 1414-1475) May 7, 1947Vol. 22 (p. 1476-1580) May 12, 1947Vol. 23 (p. 1581-1596) May 13, 1947

Prosecution Exhibits (RG 338)

Vol. 1, Exhibits 1-7

6 Vol. 2, Exhibits 8-13Vol. 3, Exhibits 14-25Vol. 4, Exhibits 26-43Vol. 5, Exhibits 44-68Vol. 6, Exhibits 69-87

Defense Exhibits (RG 338)1-44

7 Sentence Reviews and Related DocumentsPetitions for Review (RG 338) July 28, 1947Review and Recommendations

(RG 338) Feb. 1, 1948Miscellaneous Review Records

(RG 338) Mar. 15, 1948-Dec. 26, 1950Modification Board Actions

(RG 153) May 19, 1950-Oct. 21, 1952Clemency Petitions and Related Documents

(RG 338)Franz Auer May 21, 1928-Nov. 18, 1948Wilhelm Bayha May 21, 1947-Feb. 28, 1952

8 Heinrich Engelhardt May 29, 1947-Oct. 28, 1953Erika Flocken Apr. 4, 1947-Aug. 6, 1955

9 Erika Flocken Aug. 6, 1955

10 Erika Flocken Aug. 6, 1955-June 21, 1956Karl Gickeleiter Mar. 4, 1947-Aug. 9, 1952

11 Hermann Giesler Feb. 5, 1947-Oct. 31, 1952Daniel Gottschling June 27, 1947-Jan. 11, 1952

12 Wilhelm Griesinger June 17, 1947-Mar. 7, 1952Wilhelm Jergas May 13, 1947-Feb. 16, 1951Jakob Schmidberger Sept. 15, 1947-Nov. 27, 1951Herbert Spaeth May 28, 1947-June 10, 1953

14

Roll Description

13 Otto SperlingPrison Records (RG 338)Wilhelm BayhaHeinrich EngelhardtErika FlockenKarl GickeleiterHermann GieslerDaniel GottschlingWilhelm GriesingerWilhelm JergasJakob SchmidbergerHerbert SpaethOtto Sperling

Inclusive Dates

Apr. 24, 1945-Apr. 21, 1953

June 9, 1945-Feb. 24, 1952July 11, 1946-July 16, 1955June 4, 1945-July 15, 1958Feb. 13, 1947-July 19, 1952Sept. 20, 1945-Oct. 25, 1952July 10, 1946-Jan. 11, 1952Feb. 17, 1947-Feb. 28, 1952May 2, 1945-Apr. 28, 1958July 8, 1946-Dec. 14, 1951July 10, 1946-Aug. 15, 1957July 9, 1945-Sept. 25, 1957

* United States Government Printing Office: 1981—338-389/8063

15